This site is supported by the advertisements on it, please disable your AdBlocker so we can continue to provide you with the quality content you expect.
  1. Follow us on Twitter @buckeyeplanet and @bp_recruiting, like us on Facebook! Enjoy a post or article, recommend it to others! BP is only as strong as its community, and we only promote by word of mouth, so share away!
    Dismiss Notice
  2. Consider registering! Fewer and higher quality ads, no emails you don't want, access to all the forums, download game torrents, private messages, polls, Sportsbook, etc. Even if you just want to lurk, there are a lot of good reasons to register!
    Dismiss Notice

Big 12 and SEC are taking over CFB (long)

Discussion in 'Buckeye Football' started by methomps, Aug 14, 2004.

  1. methomps

    methomps an imbecility, a stupidity without name

    A Trojan's perspective...

    It was not readily apparent to me that first Saturday in December. Nor was it in early January. But each day since, it has become more clear: The Big12 and SEC are moving to monopolize the MNC table...

    ...politically. The Conference of Chapions, the B10, and the lessers are being outmanuevered. It isn't that they have better teams (although with the way the propoganda machine is churning in the South, I wouldn't recommend arguing this point with them if you want to make any progress). The leverage is this so-called "Conference Championship Game".

    The argument seems persuasive at first glance. The teams in the B12 and SEC (and, soon, the ACC) have that much harder a road because they have to play one extra game. Nevermind that last year our season ended the same day their season did (although, to be fair, they did in total play 1 extra game) or that this season teams like Georgia, LSU, and Oklahoma will have to play in the CCG to have as many games as we do (of course, they'll just try to distract the point into an "our conference is better" argument).

    Fans (at least the ones on the message boards) from the top schools in these conferences seem to have the talking points memorized. "Playing the other best team in your conference in the last game is the only way to determine a true champion." "How can you penalize a team for playing a game that other teams don't have to play?"

    Before we continue, let's take a look at how the CCG has progressed through the BCS changes. The CCG was likely started for money. 12-team conferences are so big that one team can only play about 75% of the conference. So it was only logical (and profitable) to break the conferences up into divisions and have the division winners square off in December. Either intentionally or unintentionally, the CCG became a BCS pair-of-Aces.

    It became an instant boost for any team whose SOS was hurting from too many DIAA feasts. As much as LSU fans love to argue that their schedule was infinitely better than USC's last year, the facts are that USC's SOS was better in the regular season. It is only with the rematch against Georgia that LSU was able to leapfrog over USC. Of course, if you let them tell the story then LSU was miles ahead before the Georgia game.

    But the CCG had an added bonus. As much as the human polls favor losing early over losing late, they don't necessarily penalize you for losing the last game of the season. By that time, the polls are usually tiered into groups of 0-loss teams, 1-loss teams, 2-loss teams, etc. So when an undefeated Oklahoma team loses its CCG, it almost certainly won't fall behind any 2-loss teams. Thus you have last year where one team wins its CCG and gets in the Sugar Bowl, and another team loses its CCG and still gets in the Sugar.

    Things are undeniably different this year. SOS has been removed as a stand-alone category (it is still in the computers), and the human polls now make up 66% of the calculation. Once again, the CCG conferences are already positioning themselves. They are using the CCG as leverage for any debate. Have two equal teams? Better to send the one who played a CCG. One of the top 2 teams loses a CCG? Can't punish them for playing a game the rest of the country doesn't have. 3rd place team wins its CCG? Reward them by pushing them ahead of the B10 team because the B10 team was at home watching the CCG.

    It is a myth, of course, that the CCG is the only (or best) way to determine a champion. In the Big12, you play 8 teams in the regular season and miss 3. Then you go to the CCG where there is a 50-50 chance you'll have a rematch against one of the 8 teams you already played. Maybe it makes things tougher, but I just don't see how that is a better way. Tougher maybe. Not better. Of course, since the schedules are so fractured, the key to winning the division may be who you are assigned to face and not how good you are.

    Compare this with the Pac10, where you play 8 teams and miss one (as soon as the NCAA make permenant 12-game seasons the PAC will have teams play everyone). From there, best conference record wins. This works since schedules are much similar in the Pac10. Each team will only differ by 1 game (not 3) from any other team. Thus, record is more meaningful.

    However, the CCG approach wins arguments because it is the sexier argument. It is one last hurdle that nobody else faces. It is one more true test. If we let things stand, the BCS Championship Game will soon only take CCG winners from the B12, SEC, and ACC. But it doesn't have to be that way.

    We need to carry the CCG idea to its (il)logical extreme. The Pac10 needs to host a CCT (conference championship tournament). Just like basketball, an 8-team tournament will easily trump one measily CCG. How will SEC honks be able to even mention their silly CCG win when our team just emerged from an 8-team, 2-week bloodbath? To assure that they don't one-up us, we need to make it a double-elimination deal and invite all 10 Pac teams.

    Of course, to meet NCAA standards for a CCG (barring some waiver), we need to invite more teams. Adding CSU and stealing Colorado from the B12 might send a nice message. But let's also snatch Utah and BYU. Another 2 will give us 16, which means we can have a bigger tournament.

    If any of this sounds ridiculous to you, consider that it is merely an extension of the CCG idea. Thus, an Orange bid shouldn't be the birthright of whoever wins a CCG. I admit, it is one more hurdle that our teams don't have to face. But your conference chose to add it. Things were just fine before your conferences became so bloated that a CCG was necessary.

    Many fans from B12/SEC schools say that they weren't the ones who wanted a CCG. Rather, it was their conference. They are correct. However, the Pac10/B11 didn't want CCGs either, yet we are the ones getting screwed over it. You say that it isn't fair that not all conferences are decided equally. I say this: Don't try to legislate our conference to require us to be exactly like you. Nobody forced the B12 to add a CCG, yet its fans want to force the Pac10 to add two nobodies so we can fracture our schedule (rendering the regular season less meaningful) and play some superfluous title game. This has the added bonus of diluting the talent of our conference further (I'm sure the B12/SEC fans would love that).

    The 12-team conferences now have a built-in advantage waiting for them at the end of the season. The CCG was a brilliant idea that will force our conference and the B10 to think long and hard about how we can level the playing field. If we don't, the SEC/B12 may just convince the Disney officials to make the CCGs permenant semi-finals for the ABC(s) title. Holiday Bowl, anyone?
     
  2. daddyphatsacs

    daddyphatsacs Let the cards fall... Staff Member

    Not too sure that I agree there, but the other points you hit on are fabulous.
     
  3. osugrad21

    osugrad21 Capo Regime Staff Member

    Thomps, you do realize talking anything logical with SEC/B12 fans is like pissing in the wind?
     
  4. CleveBucks

    CleveBucks Serenity now Staff Member

    Ask Tennessee how thrilled they were to play a CCG in 2001. Instead of facing miami in the Rose Bowl, they lost to LSU and end up pasting mich. in the Citrus Bowl.

    Obviously the CCG is a "built-in advantage," IF you actually win. Sure you will improve your SOS and maybe your poll rankings as well. However, winning isn't a guarantee, nor is escaping healthy.

    Bottom line, win all your games, and only then do you have a legitimate reason to complain when you get left out. There haven't been three undefeated BCS-conference teams in quite awhile (anybody know for sure?). That's why cfb is so great.
     
  5. Buckeyeskickbuttocks

    Buckeyeskickbuttocks Z --> Z^2 + c Staff Member

    The thing that kills me about the Big XII is that the conference as a whole plays the 5th toughest schedule of BCS conf. (big east is last, obviously) In any case, BXII wins these games because they should... and voters get all thrilled... It's disgraceful.. Oklahoma, a legitimatly extremely talented team, plays a 31st (or 33rd, I forget) rated schedule this year.. OSU plays the 3rd rated sched.. USC 31 or 33 (depending on what OU's is rated) LSU plays the 53rd hardest schedule (talk about an "inside" track to the NC).. WVU the 76th or so....

    Miami, tradionally playing soft scheds has sacked up this year - playing the number 2 sched. Oregon St, playing noth USC and LSU has the 1 sched this season.
     
  6. BuckeyeNation27

    BuckeyeNation27 Goal Goal USA! Staff Member

    sorry thomps....thats where i stopped reading. :lol: did you write that yourself or is it a cut and paste job?
     
  7. NorthShoreBuck

    NorthShoreBuck True Madness Requires Significant Intelligence

    Good points all around.

    The CCG was initially about money but the additional late season exposure and polls bump is an extra benefit.

    CleveBucks is correct. You still need to win them all and escape injury. Ask Oklahoma about that.

    Maybe we will end up with a few super conferences where you would never play someone in the other division until the championship game and then end up with a 8 or 4 team NCS playoff?

    I like the bowls the way they are. As with the economy the conferences seem to have up and down years. Which will prevail this year? I do not know but that is why I love college football.
     
  8. zincfinger

    zincfinger Gert Frobe-approved

    Not too worried about it. If the Big10 and Pac-10 decide they don't like the way the BCS is evolving, they can get out and go back to the old way of doing things at the Rose Bowl. I think the Rose Bowl committee would go for it. I think we're a long way from anything like that, though.
     
  9. Airspace

    Airspace Newbie

    The SEC, Big 12 and ACC are just spinning lies for financial gain. The SEC went to a championship game for financial gain and added exposure for their conference.

    The Big 12 followed suit. Lets face it, the Big 12 was created out of two conferences that had a hard time making it financially. In fact the Big 12 is still not making as much as the other premier conferences and not getting the exposure either. Just go to their boards and hear them complain about the money and lack of exposure.

    The ACC saw the money of having a conference championship game and needed to expand. Please tell me what Virginia Tech, Miami and Boston College have in common with the rest of the ACC. A conference should be more than athletics but common values pertaining to education. Oh yeah, education does not matter (that's what they have in common). What type of conference plays its biggest game the first week of the year (miami vs fsu). Tell me it is not about trying to get two teams to the BCS. If Ohio State vs Michigan or USC vs UCLA hab been played the first week, how many times could the loser have rebounded and still had a shot at a MNC. What a joke.

    The Big 10 and the Pac 10 share very similiar values when it comes to education and athletics. That is one of the reasons why the Big 10 vs Pac 10 matchup has been very special. What alot of you may not know or remember is that many Big 10 teams did not play teams from the old deep south prior to the mid-late 70's because of their values when it came to education and athletics and minorities.

    Now the SEC, Big 12 and ACC are finding out that a conference championship game is not all that it cracks up to be. Yeah, its a financial gain and gives added expsoure but if the one team loses, there goes an MNC matchup. To down play this they need to attack those of us without a championship game. We were not the idiots who rushed into this without thinking. Now that it has bitten them, they got to spin to save themselves. If you don't want the risk, then don't play the game.

    Last year's attempt at a national championship game was a farce. It was a rigged game. After Oklahoma lost, it should have been USC vs LSU. But based on the BcS format, USC got hosed. When another team gets hosed they will change it again.

    If the SEC, Big 12 and ACC think the MNC is their toy to be played with by only themselves, it might be time for a real playoff.

    If the SEC, Big 12 and ACC are not carefull they may be caught holding the bag. Add this situation with what has been happening in college baseball, illegal activities in athletic departments and bogus student/athletes: certain conferences may realize that it is time to start their own athletic association with conferences of similiar morals/values when it comes to education and athletics.
     
  10. BB73

    BB73 Loves Buckeye History Staff Member Bookie '16 & '17 Upset Contest Winner

    thomps,

    Good points. But I also think that Oklahoma 'not dropping' in the polls with the late loss isn't valid. If that loss was in the first half of the season, I think they could have been back to #1 in the human polls by the end of the year.
     
  11. BuckStocksHere

    BuckStocksHere Semper Fi!

    2 opinions -

    1. LSU was the champion. We are all playing to be the BCS Champ right? Enjoy your AP championship USC - I could care less.

    2. Conference Championship games are a joke. The Big10 doesn't need one.
     
  12. funman

    funman Rookie

    OSU v. scUM = Conf. Champ Game.
     
  13. AnnArborBuck

    AnnArborBuck Newbie

    On the flip side, how about Nebraska in 2001. They made the rose bowl after they lost their conference championship. It seems to me that they (big 12, sec) spin the CCG to best fit their needs. If the team wins they say "look at us, we won our conference" and if they lose they say "well we had to play an extra game, so it shouldn't count against in terms of the BCS".

    I think with the new BCS formula (totally crappy IMO now) the Pac10 and Big10 are going to get screwed. Actually, the Big10 will get screwed more then the Pac10 because we are not as media "friendly" as the Pac10 (USC for example). Because now with the extra game, the SEC, Big12, and ACC will have the opportunity to leap frog an idle Pac10/Big10 school. in the near future there are going to be some pissed off fans. I have to wonder if the latest updates in the BCS where put in place to screw it up even more so they are forced (by fans/money) to switch to a tourney system.
     
  14. coxew

    coxew Newbie

    Nebraska didn't even get to play in the CCG. It was the same day that we won in Ann Arbor that NU got spanked by Colorado 62-36 in a regular season game for their only pre-bowl loss. Colorado then went on to win the Big 12 with a record of 10-2. They avenged an early season loss to Texas (41-7) with a 39-37 victory in the CCG and represented the Big 12 in the Fiesta Bowl as Nebraska, who didn't even play in the CCG got the opportunity to play for the national title.
     
  15. CleveBucks

    CleveBucks Serenity now Staff Member

    Exactly...

    Which teams in the BCS era have made it to the MNC game due to winning the CCG?
     

Share This Page